I want to shoot weddings with my D700 and I'm thinking about getting the Nikon 24-70. A midrange zoom seems practical for weddings because it is much quicker than switching lenses out in the middle of a wedding. I'm looking for feedback from anyone with experience either with weddings or this particular lens. Thank you.

The 24-70 is essential for event work. I have it and all of the f/1.8 primes (28/50/85). The 24-70 is a very sharp lens even wide open, with excellent microcontrast and pleasing rendering of midtone gradations. It has jittery bokeh, but that is a problem that any mid-range zoom has. But you will miss too many critical moments working with the primes.

You can sometimes find the 24-70 refurbished at a good price. I found it at $1560 compared to over $1800 new.

As a fairly experienced wedding photographer I like to have a change now and then to freshen up the way I work and to set myself a challenge - so I now use mostly prime lenses at weddings. But for many years the (Canon) 24-70 and 70-200 lenses were my staple, and if you could only use one lens for a whole wedding the 24-70 would arguably be the way to go.

Hey, man, I'm old. The 24-70 on the 1D and the 70-200 on the other 1D and a heavy bag over the shoulder - it does get heavy at the end of the day. Not so great around the neck, too. Exercise helps, but isn't a panacea.

I've got one of these lenses and probably 90% of the images I've shot- street stuff in Afghanistan, mostly- have been done with it. Used on a D700 and a D3X and just bought a D800E which I am looking forward to using with the lens. It's my bread and butter, no doubt. Yes. it's heavy. But just so, so versatile.

I shoot weddings (mostly in China), and this is the lens everybody uses. I do use primes with 2 bodies when I can, mostly because I'm trying to get something a bit different, but with one body, that lens is super efficient for weddings and events in general.

I had to send my Nikon 24-70mm in for service to Nikon after I dropped it. Almost four weeks now am I am still waiting for it to come back. They had to get the part from Japan to repair it. A basic, workhorse professional lens from Nikon and four weeks to get it fixed because of no parts.

I don't know, but I've had people tell me Tamron is a lot faster for repair. If that is true, makes you wonder if in some cases the Tamron might not be the better choice?